Nairobi, Kenya - A new road is needed in the Kenyan Osupuku Conservancy. And strong stone is needed for the road. A Chinese corporation, Sinohydro, owns a rock quarry, which offers the best stones to build a strong road; a road which wouldn’t need repairs for a long time. However, the rock quarry poses a threat to the aboriginal wildlife of the region.

The Osupuku Conservancy was created in 2008 as a means of protecting elephants. The conservancy is a corridor that links Amboseli to Kenya’s Chyullu Hills and Tsavo National Parks and is a thoroughfare for elephant migration. However, elephants may discontinue using the conservancy if the rock quarry is permitted to continue.

“We are not against the building of the road, but [we are against] the area from which the material for the road construction is to be gotten from,” said African Wildlife Foundation (AWF)’s Fiesta Warinwa. The quarry is controversial for multiple reasons, but first and foremost may be the use of explosives in creating the quarry.

Unless you are a vegetarian, you probably agree that chicken is delicious. But could this fowl have a future in automobiles? According to a presentation made at the 13th Annual Green Chemical and Engineering Conference this weekend…maybe. It seems that carbonized chicken feathers can hold hydrogen quite well; better than carbon nanotubes or metal hydrides currently being tested as hydrogen carriers. Could this solve the infrastructure problems currently holding hydrogen technology back?

The concept was presented by University of Deleware Engineering graduate student Erman Senoz. It works like this; chicken feathers are made up of a natural protein called keratin. This forms hard, hollow tubes (if you’ve ever plucked a feather, you know what I’m talking about) that when heated creates crosslinks. This in turn strengthens the structure, becomes more porus, and increases the surface area. These carbonized feather-tubes can hold as much, if not more than the much-more expensive carbon nanotubes or metal hydrirdes.

Growing food in your own backyard is hardly a new concept, nor is utilizing any open space available if you live in the city, but turning your rooftop into a garden?  Well that idea has caught on in cities throughout the world, and now is starting to gain a foothold in the United States as well.

Rooftop gardens are by no means new.  Forward thinking, environmentally conscious, or penurious city dwellers have been doing it for as long as there have been city dwellers.  But recently the rooftop garden movement has started to gain some traction, inspired by the environmental benefit of more green space in a city (it reduces the “heat island” effect), and the appeal of home grown organic veggies just steps away have given the movement some serious traction.

Whether you homeschool, are actively seeking summer bridge activities, or just want something to do with the kids every now and then, math is something that can be really nice to do together as a family. Especially if you’re not that into math yourself.

We all know the many benefits, for parents and children, of family-centered activities. But family-centered activities that are also learning-centered have additional benefits–they model good learning habits, and they make learning fun. They can also, if you, yourself, are a little dicey about a certain subject, go a long way towards NOT passing down that same leeriness in your children (It took my partner and I several minutes, and a paper and pencil, to figure out the per-comic price in a Classifieds ad in which a guy was selling 1400 comic books for $99–we do NOT want our daughters to grow up that fundamentally math-stupid).

A new site called What’s On My Food just launched this week. It is a godsend for moms everywhere who are concerned about pesticides in our and our babies’ food, not to mention water systems and the air. Did you know that the average American child gets five plus servings of pesticides in their food and water daily? Did you know that Atrazine, a potent endocrine disrupter banned in Europe, is found in 71% of US drinking water? What’s On My Food is full of horrific little tidbits like these and provides easy-to-grok visual breakdowns of pesticides in common foods.

Pesticides are a big problem for little bodies.
Babies and children have high metabolisms and they eat and drink significantly more, in relation to body weight, than adults, all of which further concentrate pesticide deposits in their tissues and still-developing internal organs. Pesticides and other pollutants can interfere with proper sexual differentiation; they can also cause other birth defects and multigenerational health problems such as allergies, immunotoxicity, neurotoxicity, and cancer in the individual, that individual’s offspring, and subsequent generations.

The Endocrine Society, a medical group representing the research of hormones, issued an intake warning at their annual meeting earlier this month.

The group is concerned over bisphenol-A and similar hormone-disrupting chemicals, found in plastics, pesticides, and other products. It said in a statement that bisphenol-A is a

’significant concern for public health’ and that it’s important for consumers to take a ‘precautionary approach’ to limit their exposure.

This follows on the heels of a few more studies regarding BPA. First–and most worrisome–is the recent study that showed that human exposure to BPA is likely much higher than previously thought and much higher than deemed “safe” by the FDA. That study’s author, Dr. Frederick vom Saal, who presented his study’s findings at the Endocrine Society’s annual meeting, said of the chemical:

BPA is now known to be a potent estrogen.

Human and animal studies indicate it could be related to diabetes, heart disease, liver abnormalities, miscarriage and other reproductive abnormalities, as well as prostate and breast cancer.

There has been a lot of talk lately about how many servings of fish is too much and which fish are the best to eat. With concerns like mercury poisoning, eating farm-raised fish or wild fish, genetic engineering and over fishing, it’s important to consider certain things when choosing your next fish dinner or sushi roll.

Doctors and health professionals in general recommend fish because of the high dose of Omega 3’s fatty acids a serving supplies you with. A 6-ounce serving of fish can provide a day’s worth of high quality protein for adults. Eating fish once a week should not cause any concern for most people. For those fish eaters who partake in multiple servings of fish a week, especially children and pregnant women, the main concern can become mercury poisoning. Eating too much mercury-ridden fish can cause certain health problems including impairment in memory and behavior, tingling in the hands, feet, and lips, as well as causing possible damage to the heart and immune system. Aside from the mercury concern, we now have a number of different fish species that are soon to become extinct due to over fishing, or are being caught using environmentally destructive methods. There are some very simple rules to follow to be certain you are not getting a side dish of mercury or hurting the environment with your fish entree.

You’ve likely heard of Skin Deep, the cosmetic safety database which lists the toxicity of ingredients in personal care products.  But did you know there is now a similar database for food?
 
What’s On My Food, a brand-new searchable database launched yesterday by the Pesticide Action Network, will give you the inside scoop on exactly what chemicals are on the food you eat.  With just a click of the mouse, you can view the toxicology risk and known pesticide residues on everything from almonds to oats to winter squash.

For instance,  did you know 82% of conventional applesauce contains Carbendazim, an endocrine disruptor known to cause tumors in rats and ranked by Friends for Earth as one of the “Filthy Four” pesticides? Suddenly organic applesauce doesn’t seem quite so expensive, and the thought of making it at home doesn’t seem nearly as daunting.

The helpful — if not somewhat disturbing — website details each pesticide’s risk to human health by placing each chemical in one of the following toxicological categories:

 - Carcinogen
 - Hormone Disrupters
 - Neurotoxin
 - Developmental/Reproductive Toxins

Data used to compile this database was gathered from the EPA’s Pesticide Reregistration Decisions, the Pesticide Info Database, and the USDA’s Pesticide Data Program.

Source: Go Media, Image: Jekrub on Flickr, Written by Gina Munsey

There is enough energy stored beneath the earth’s surface to power all of our energy demands thousands of times over. The problem is, it’s thousands of feet beneath us. Out of sight. Out of mind. But what if we could get to it? What if we could harvest that power?

That’s the task at hand for Jared Potter. Jared Potter, CEO of Potter Drilling, is developing technology that his father, Robert Potter, initiated over 30 years ago while working at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. Robert Potter worked on developing Hot Dry Rock (HDR) heat mining, which, simply put, is a method of harvesting geothermal energy by pumping water into hot, crystalline rock via an injection well. The water is superheated as it flows through open joints in the hot rock reservoir, and is returned through production wells. At the surface, the useful heat is extracted by conventional processes, and the same water is recirculated to mine more heat.

Developed nations have so far ignored the guidelines and warning issued by the UNFCCC regarding the amounts of carbon emissions that they need to reduce by the year 2020 in order to prevent a climatic catastrophe.

According to the scientific panel of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the world must cumulatively reduce its carbon emissions by at least 25 to 40 percent in order to mitigate the adverse effects of global warming. However, during the ongoing round of Climate Change Talks at Bonn, Germany, the developed nations have failed to come up with convincing targets for reducing their greenhouse gas outputs.

While the European Union has made it clear to notch up its 20 percent reduction target by 2020 to 30 percent if rest of the developed nations agree to a 20 percent reduction target, there has been poor response from countries like Australia, United States and Japan.

The United States Congress has passed a bill calling for 14 percent reduction by 2020 from 1990 levels but the Obama administration is yet to promise anything substantial at the international forum. The United States is in discussions with China and has been trying to get the Chinese government to agree to some kind of emission reduction goals. And although China seems ready for voluntary sectoral emission cuts, an official deal has not been reached yet which could be the possible reason for US government’s reluctance in announcing a definite target.

Over the last few years, the wind energy sector has been experiencing tremendous growth as governments and utilities around the world seek sources of energy that generate reduced greenhouse gas emissions. In Ontario, the province has plans to increase the wind component of its electricity generation from the current 1 percent to 15 percent by 2025.

For the most part the wind energy industry has coasted along with favorable press and public opinion. The industry has had to weather some resistance, particularly pertaining to wildlife impacts (primarily birds and bats) and the consistency and reliability of wind power. Yet these criticisms have not gained enough traction to have a noticeable effect on the growth of the industry, which is being hailed as a source of tens of thousands of potential new jobs in the evolving green economy.

But over time another resistance to the wind industry has emerged focusing on the negative impacts of wind turbines on human health. This movement has been steadily growing in both its organizational power and the press coverage that it has been receiving.

As the earth warms, the melting of the earth’s two massive ice sheets-Antarctica and Greenland-could raise sea level enormously. If the Greenland ice sheet were to melt, it would raise sea level 7 meters (23 feet). Melting of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet would raise sea level 5 meters (16 feet). But even just partial melting of these ice sheets will have a dramatic effect on sea level rise. Senior scientists are noting that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) projections of sea level rise during this century of 18 to 59 centimeters are already obsolete and that a rise of 2 meters during this time is within range.

As I note in Plan B 3.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization, assessing the prospects for the Greenland ice sheet begins with looking at the warming of the Arctic region. A 2005 study, conducted by the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA) team, an international group of 300 scientists, concluded that the Arctic is warming almost twice as fast as the rest of the planet. It found that in the regions surrounding the Arctic, including Alaska, western Canada, and eastern Russia, winter temperatures have already climbed by 3-4 degrees Celsius (4–7 degrees Fahrenheit) over the last half-century.

In testimony before the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee, Sheila Watt-Cloutier, an Inuit speaking on behalf of the 155,000 Inuits who live in Alaska, Canada, Greenland, and the Russian Federation, described their struggle to survive in the fast-changing Arctic climate as "a snapshot of what is happening to the planet." She called the warming of the Arctic "a defining event in the history of this planet."